PDF A History of Finnish Higher Education From The Middle Ages To The 21St Century Jussi Valimaa Ebook Full Chapter

A History of Finnish Higher Education
from the Middle Ages to the 21st

Century Jussi Välimaa
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-history-of-finnish-higher-education-from-the-middle-
ages-to-the-21st-century-jussi-valimaa/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
A Short History of the Middle Ages Barbara H. Rosenwein
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-short-history-of-the-middle-
ages-barbara-h-rosenwein/
Epic Performances from the Middle Ages Into the Twenty

First Century Fiona Macintosh
https://textbookfull.com/product/epic-performances-from-the-
middle-ages-into-the-twenty-first-century-fiona-macintosh/
The Hunt for Earth Gravity: A History of Gravity

Measurement from Galileo to the 21st Century John
Milsom
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-hunt-for-earth-gravity-a-
history-of-gravity-measurement-from-galileo-to-the-21st-century-
john-milsom/
History of the Middle Ages 300 1500 James Westfall

Thompson
https://textbookfull.com/product/history-of-the-middle-
ages-300-1500-james-westfall-thompson/
A Cultural History of Hair in the Middle Ages 1st
Edition Roberta Milliken (Editor)
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-cultural-history-of-hair-in-
the-middle-ages-1st-edition-roberta-milliken-editor/
Cultures of Witchcraft in Europe from the Middle Ages

to the Present 1st Edition Jonathan Barry
https://textbookfull.com/product/cultures-of-witchcraft-in-
europe-from-the-middle-ages-to-the-present-1st-edition-jonathan-
barry/
ARCHAEOTECHNOLOGY STUDIES Raw material exploitation

from prehistory to the Middle Ages Selena Vitezovi■
https://textbookfull.com/product/archaeotechnology-studies-raw-
material-exploitation-from-prehistory-to-the-middle-ages-selena-
vitezovic/
African Women Early History to the 21st Century

Kathleen Sheldon
https://textbookfull.com/product/african-women-early-history-to-
the-21st-century-kathleen-sheldon/
Faces of Muhammad: Western Perceptions of the Prophet

of Islam from the Middle Ages to Today John Tolan
https://textbookfull.com/product/faces-of-muhammad-western-
perceptions-of-the-prophet-of-islam-from-the-middle-ages-to-
today-john-tolan/
Higher Education Dynamics 52
Jussi Välimaa
A History of
Finnish Higher
Education from
the Middle Ages to
the 21st Century
Higher Education Dynamics
Volume 52
Series Editors
Peter Maassen, Department of Education, Faculty of Educational Science,
University of Oslo, Blindern, Oslo, Norway
Johan Müller, School of Education, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch,
South Africa
Editorial Board
Alberto Amaral, CIPES and Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
Akira Arimoto, Hyogo University, Kakogawa, Japan
Nico Cloete, CHET, Pretoria, South Africa
David Dill, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
Jürgen Enders, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
Patricia Gumport, Stanford Institute for Higher Education, Stanford, USA
Mary Henkel, Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
Glen Jones, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
Scope of the Series
Higher Education Dynamics is a book series intending to study adaptation processes
and their outcomes in higher education at all relevant levels. In addition it wants to
examine the way interactions between these levels affect adaptation processes. It
aims at applying general social science concepts and theories as well as testing
theories in the field of higher education research. It wants to do so in a manner that
is of relevance to all those professionally involved in higher education, be it as
ministers, policy-makers, politicians, institutional leaders or administrators, higher
education researchers, members of the academic staff of universities and colleges,
or students. It will include both mature and developing systems of higher education,
covering public as well as private institutions.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/6037

Jussi Välimaa
A History of Finnish
Higher Education from the
Middle Ages to the
21st Century
Jussi Välimaa
University of Jyväskylä
Jyväskylä, Finland
ISSN 1571-0378 ISSN 2215-1923 (electronic)

Higher Education Dynamics
ISBN 978-3-030-20807-3 ISBN 978-3-030-20808-0 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20808-0
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Contents
1 Introduction�� 1
1.1 The University as an Organisation and Institution�� 1
1.2 Historical Layers in Higher Education �� 3
1.3 The Main Research Literature�� 6
1.4 The Scope and Method of the Study�� 7
2 The Emergence of Universities in the Middle Ages�� 11
2.1 The First Universities�� 11
2.2 Differences Between Studia Generalia and Studia Particularia�� 14
2.3 Bologna and Paris as the Archetypes of Universities�� 15
2.4 The Relationship Between Universities and Cities�� 18
2.5 Education and Students at Medieval Universities�� 22
2.5.1 Characteristics of Medieval Instruction and Studies�� 22
2.5.2 Five Student Types�� 25
2.5.3 The Degrees and the Mobility of Teachers �� 27
2.6 Scholasticism, Collegiums, and Universities
as a Social Innovation �� 29
2.6.1 Collegium as a Form of Collaboration
and a Solution to Accommodation Problems�� 30
2.6.2 Why Universities Did not Develop in Other Civilisations 33
2.7 The Development of the Relationship Between Universities
and Society�� 34
2.8 The Cornerstones and Historical Layers of Medieval
Universities �� 36
3 Finnish Students at Medieval Universities�� 39
3.1 The Beginnings of the Connection to the Western
Cultural Sphere �� 39
3.2 The Beginning of Schooling in Finland�� 42
3.3 Finnish Students at European Universities �� 45
3.4 To Which Universities Were Finnish Students Sent and Why?�� 46
3.5 Who Were the Students? �� 51
v
vi Contents
3.6 How Did the Finnish Students Fare in Their Studies?�� 52
3.7 The Social Significance of University Studies�� 53
3.8 The Decline of the Middle Ages, Humanists, and Universities�� 54
4 From the Reformation to the End of Swedish Rule – Laying
the Foundations of a National University�� 57
4.1 The Reformation and the Rise of Centralised States�� 57
4.2 The Reformation and Education �� 60
4.3 The Thrice-Founded University of Uppsala and Finnish
University Students �� 63
4.4 Higher Education and Studying Abroad
in the Seventeenth Century �� 64
4.4.1 Education as an Instrument of Politics – Petrus Erici
Petrosa and the Jesuits�� 64
4.4.2 Aristocratic Education: The Case of Johan Jespersson
Kruus�� 65
4.5 What Happened to Humanism?�� 67
4.6 School Conditions in Finland After the Reformation �� 68
4.6.1 Reforms in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries:
Pedagogiums, Trivial Schools, and Gymnasiums�� 69
4.6.2 Attempts to Reform Education in the Estate Society�� 71
4.6.3 The Four-Estates Doctrine and Patron-Client
Relationships�� 72
4.7 An Educational System? �� 73
5 The Founding of the Royal Academy of Turku �� 75
5.1 The Founding of the Royal Academy of Turku in 1640 �� 76
5.2 The Charter: Justifying the Founding of the Academy of Turku�� 78
5.3 The Inauguration of the Academy of Turku:
“God’s Greatest Good Deed Since the Creation of the World”�� 80
5.4 The Statutes and Privileges of the University �� 81
5.5 The First Professors of the Academy of Turku �� 83
5.6 The Governing Bodies of the University of Turku:
the Consistory, the Rector, and the Chancellor �� 84
6 The Academy of Turku During the Last Century of Swedish
Rule (1720–1809)�� 87
6.1 The Academy of Turku as a Community�� 88
6.2 The Controversy over the Professorship of Economics
Between 1746 and 1747�� 90
6.3 Research at the University of Turku and at the Academies
of Sciences�� 92
6.4 The Academy of Turku and the Rise of Local Patriotism�� 96
6.5 The Number of Students and Their Socio-Economic
Background �� 98
6.5.1 The Development of the Number of Students
in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries�� 98
Contents vii
6.5.2 The Students’ Socio-Economic Background�� 100

6.5.3 Students’ Entrance Examinations, Grants
and Accommodation �� 103
6.5.4 The Significance of Degrees in the Labour Market�� 105
6.5.5 The Birth of Nations �� 106
6.6 The Economy of the Academy of Turku and Its Professors �� 107
6.7 The Historical Layer of the Academy of Turku�� 109
7 The Age of Autonomy – The Role of Higher Education
in the Building of the Nation �� 111
7.1 The European Framework – The Napoleonic Wars
and the Crisis of Universities�� 111
7.2 Finland’s Separation from Sweden �� 116
7.2.1 The Emergence of the Autonomous Grand
Duchy of Finland and the University of Turku�� 116
7.2.2 An Overview of Finnish History During the Age
of Autonomy �� 119
7.3 From the Academy of Turku to the Imperial Alexander
University�� 123
7.3.1 Students of the Year 1822 and Finland �� 127
7.4 Changes in the University’s Statutes in 1828 and 1852�� 129
7.4.1 The Statutes of the Imperial Alexander University
of Finland in 1828: Establishing the Changes�� 129
7.4.2 The Historical Developments Leading to the Statutes
of 1852�� 132
7.4.3 The New Statutes of 1852�� 134
7.4.4 The Finnish Language and the University�� 137
7.4.5 The Science Societies and the Finnish Language �� 138
7.5 Students of the University in the Nineteenth-Century�� 139
7.5.1 The Number of Students and Their Socio-Economic
Background�� 139
7.5.2 The Distribution of University Students by Discipline
and Gender�� 143
7.5.3 Highly Educated Finns in the Service of Russia�� 145
7.6 Professors’ Socio-Economic Backgrounds and Elite Renewal�� 145
7.7 The University as the Cradle of Civil Society
and the Nation-State�� 147
8 The Expansion of Higher Education into Practical-Utilitarian
Disciplines �� 153
8.1 Reforming the Educational System�� 153
8.2 The Emergence of New Higher Education Institutions�� 157
8.3 The Debate on Practical-Utilitarian Education
in the Nineteenth Century �� 157
8.4 From the Technical Real School to the Polytechnic
Institute and the University of Technology �� 160
viii Contents
8.5 Business Education and Its Development Towards

University-Level Business Institutions �� 163
8.6 The Development of Agriculture and Forestry Education –
From Agricultural Institutes into a Faculty of the Alexander
University�� 165
8.7 Hamina Cadet School: An Institute for Young Noblemen�� 168
8.8 Folk School Teacher Training Colleges and the Debate
Leading to Their Establishment�� 169
8.8.1 The Founding of Jyväskylä Teacher Training
Seminary in 1863 and the First Years of the Seminary�� 171
8.8.2 The Founding of Teacher Training Seminaries
Before the Age of Independence�� 174
8.8.3 Teacher Trainees’ Socio-economic Background
and Social Relations �� 176
8.8.4 Emma Irene Åström and the Educational Policy
of the Nineteenth Century�� 178
8.8.5 The “Spirit” of Teacher Training Seminaries�� 179
8.9 The Debate on New Universities�� 180
8.10 The Historical Layer of the Age of Autonomy �� 182
9 The First Decades of Independence – White Finland�� 185
9.1 The Birth of White Finland and Its Development
till the Second World War �� 186
9.2 Social Change and the Higher Education System
of White Finland �� 189
9.3 The Founding of New Universities in the 1910s
and the 1920s�� 192
9.3.1 Åbo Akademi University�� 192
9.3.2 The University of Turku – “A Free People’s
Gift to Free Science”�� 193
9.4 The Founding of New Higher Education Institutions
in the 1930s �� 194
9.4.1 From the Civic College to the School
of Social Sciences �� 195
9.4.2 The Founding of the College of Education
in Jyväskylä�� 196
9.5 The Development and Significance of the University
of Helsinki�� 197
9.6 Students of the University and their Backgrounds�� 200
9.6.1 The Problem of “The Overflow of Matriculated
Students”�� 201
9.6.2 The Students’ Socio-economic Background
and Gender�� 203
9.7 The Historical Layer of Higher Education in White
Finland – Why an Elite System?�� 206
Contents ix
10 The Development of Finland’s Higher Education System

After the Second World War – Towards a Welfare State �� 209
10.1 Social and Political Changes and Trends�� 209
10.2 The Activation of Higher Education Policy After the Wars�� 214
10.2.1 The Requirement for a More Systematic Higher
Education Policy and the Problems of Private Higher
Education Institutions �� 215
10.2.2 The Process of Founding the University of Oulu�� 216
10.3 The Layers of Higher Education Policy-Making in Finland
Between the 1950s and the 1980s�� 220
10.3.1 The Academic-Traditional View of Universities�� 220
10.3.2 Effects of the Myrberg Committee �� 223
10.3.3 The Expansion of Higher Education
and 12 November 1965�� 224
10.3.4 The Drafting of the Development Act of 1967
and Its Effects �� 227
10.4 The University Governance Reform and the Degree
Reform of the 1970s�� 230
10.4.1 The Battle Over the Governance Reform �� 230
10.4.2 The Degree Reform as a Reform�� 233
10.4.3 Outcomes of the Governance and Degree Reforms�� 236
10.4.4 The Comprehensive School Reform
and the Reform of Teacher Education�� 237
10.5 Towards an Accountable Entrepreneurial University�� 239
10.5.1 “The Globalisation Shock” and Its Effects �� 242
10.5.2 Higher Education Legislation
After the Globalisation Shock�� 246
10.5.3 The Expansion of the Open University
as a Result of the Globalisation Shock �� 247
10.5.4 From Academies of Art to Universities of Art�� 248
10.5.5 The Linkage Between the National Innovation
System and Higher Education�� 249
10.6 The Contents of and the Process of Drafting
the Universities Act of 2009�� 251
10.6.1 The Main Contents of the Universities Act�� 254
10.6.2 Effects of the Universities Act�� 257
10.7 The Dynamics of Higher Education Reforms�� 259
11 The Growth of Student Numbers and the Establishment
of Polytechnics�� 261
11.1 The Development of the Number of Students
from the 1940s to the 2010s�� 261
11.2 The Two “Perennial Problems” – Over-Education
and University Students�� 265
x Contents
11.2.1 Over-Education – Educating Too Many

and Too Much �� 265
11.2.2 Lazy University Students�� 266
11.3 The Students’ Socio-economic Background and Participation
in Higher Education�� 267
11.4 Changes in the Student Population and the Choice
of the Discipline�� 272
11.5 The Highly Educated in the Labour Market �� 273
11.6 Professors’ Socio-economic Background in the 1980s�� 275
11.7 The Establishment of Polytechnics�� 277
11.7.1 Vocational Education and Training Before the 1990s�� 277
11.7.2 The Polytechnics Reform of the 1990s�� 278
11.8 An Overview of Finnish Higher Education
in the Twentieth Century – Expansion and Massification,
Harmonisation, and Diversification�� 283
11.8.1 Finnish Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century�� 286
11.8.2 The Most Recent Historical Layers – The
Strengthening of Governance and Managerialism�� 288
12 Conclusions – The Institutional and Organisational
Layers of Finnish Higher Education�� 291
12.1 The Historical Layers of Teaching – Lectures, Disputations,
Seminars, and Laboratory Work �� 293
12.2 The Historical Layers of Research�� 293
12.3 The Historical Layers of Decision-Making, Administration,
and Management�� 294
12.4 Traditions and the Future�� 297
�� 299
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
�� 321
Chapter 1
Introduction
This book describes and analyses the development of Finnish higher education from
the Middle Ages to the twenty-first century. The book starts from medieval universi-
ties, because without knowledge of the origins of universities and their social and
academic starting points, it is difficult to understand why universities have become
the multilayered organisations and institutions they are today. Medieval universities
were not only the first universities but also the first higher education institutions of
Finnish students and continued to be so up to the Reformation. A significant mile-
stone in the history of Finnish higher education was the inauguration of the Royal
Academy of Turku, established in 1640 as the northernmost university in the world.
The academy gave a significant impetus to the development of university education
in the Grand Duchy of Finland, which at that time was one of three main provinces
of the Kingdom of Sweden. The story continues and expands in the nineteenth cen-
tury when present-day Finland, boosted by Fennoman nationalism and the Imperial
Alexander University, started to find its national identity under the Russian Empire.
The book discusses the expansion of the Finnish higher education system, which
began in the nineteenth century, accelerated in the twentieth century, and exploded
after the 1950s. The story culminates into the establishment of polytechnics in the
1990s and ends in an analysis of the Universities Act enforced in the 2010s.1
1.1 The University as an Organisation and Institution
A key starting point for the book is the notion that universities are both organisa-
tions and institutions. However, there are within universities a wide array of views
as to what their goals and best practices are in terms of governance, leadership, and
1
This book is based on the arguments developed by the author in his Finnish-language book
Opinteillä oppineita. Suomalainen korkeakoulutus keskiajalta 2000-luvulle (2018).
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 1

J. Välimaa, A History of Finnish Higher Education from the Middle Ages to the
21st Century, Higher Education Dynamics 52,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20808-0_1
2 1 Introduction
academic affairs. These have been debated and disputed throughout history and
have resulted in various organisational structures over time. The views differ along
several dimensions within universities. The most traditional divides are those based
on the disciplines, because in the academic world, disciplines typically exert a
strong influence on how students and academics view themselves, the world, and
life. In other words, they are associated with human identity (see Becher 1989;
Välimaa 1995). The prestige of the disciplines has varied over time, which, in turn,
has impacted views of the role and status of universities in society. Another tradi-
tional divide is the one between students and teachers and their differing goals and
views of the universities’ core tasks. Views also differ between those in leading
positions at universities (academic leaders and the managerial staff) and those doing
the “grass-roots” work, such as university teachers and researchers. A further divide
concerns the nature of employment relationships, which has to do with academic
statuses and authority. And still another divide is the one between the genders,
which has been an issue also at higher education institutions (HEIs) since the 1960s.
Besides all these internal divides, the surrounding society has also always wanted to
have a say in university affairs, in the organisation of universities, and often even in
academic curricula.
However, apart from being an organisation, universities have also taken care of
the task of providing younger generations with higher learning. Higher education is
thus also a social institution, one that exists in all organised societies.2 As an institu-
tion, higher education is responsible for transmitting knowledge, understanding,
and ways of thinking and thus also social values and norms to new generations. At
the same time, however, higher education has educated and is educating medical
doctors, lawyers, teachers, priests, engineers, and other experts – that is, members
of the professions – for society. Academic research has also always searched for the
truth and strived to explain and understand the world through research and by theo-
rising. These social responsibilities mean that universities are both political organ-
isations and a political institution, because they have the potential both to change
and to reproduce societies. By the same token, the relationship between the institu-
tion of higher education and research and those in power has always been – and still
is – strained. The relationship can be described as a field where higher education
institutions have affected society and society has affected higher education institu-
tions. Throughout history, those in power have wanted to know, and even control,
what and how universities are teaching and/or researching. Universities, for their
part, have been at least as eager to defend their self-determination, or autonomy,
and, closely related to this, academic freedom. These have justifiably been regarded
as the best guarantee of high-quality education and research.
These two themes – higher education as an organisation and higher education as
an institution – will be discussed largely in parallel, the starting point being that the
interplay between the two gives birth to various organisational and institutional
2
A general definition of institutions is that they are building blocks of social order (Streeck and
Theelen 2005, p. 9).
1.2 Historical Layers in Higher Education 3
practices and accumulates historical layers within universities and higher education
institutions.
Academically, the book falls within the framework of historical research and
higher education research (see Ahola and Välimaa 2002). Higher education research
examines all tertiary level institutions, whether universities, higher education insti-
tutions, or polytechnics, because higher education is defined by its subject: higher
education as a social phenomenon. Therefore, I will also discuss institutions which
started as lower level institutes but subsequently developed into higher education
institutions. For example, practical-utilitarian disciplines such as technology, busi-
ness, and teacher education are all today taught at university level institutions in
Finland, even though initially the instruction was provided at institutions corre-
sponding to post-secondary level institutes. The justification for this is the historical
fact that not even the first universities were originally established as universities but
developed into such over time.
The perspective of the book is historical, because knowledge of the development
of universities helps us to understand their present. I mainly rely on existing studies,
because given the sheer vastness of the phenomenon, research based on primary
sources would not have been possible. Thus, the goal is to make a synthesis of the
existing research literature. The analysis will take us to today (the 2010s), which is
not very common in historical research. When examining the present, the point of
view will have to be more sociological. This is because the theoretical devices of
sociological research help to analyse the present from an intellectual distance,
whereas in historical research, the intellectual distance between the social phenom-
enon studied and the researcher is based on time (the past).
However, an analysis of higher education cannot be limited to universities and
higher education institutions, because changes and reforms at the lower levels of
education have always affected or at least been reflected in higher education. In
addition, selection to higher education takes and has always taken place at the lower
levels of education. Therefore, I will discuss, at least superficially, the development
of the entire Finnish educational system. I will also look at Finnish higher education
from an international angle, because universities and other HEIs have always bor-
rowed ideas from other countries and followed international research trends.
A central intellectual challenge of the book is to explain how higher education
has changed as part of society. Therefore, each chapter of the book will start with a
brief overview of the main historical developments of the period in Finland. This
will hopefully help the reader to better understand both the historical contexts and
how higher education was arranged during each period.
1.2 Historical Layers in Higher Education
A history of universities presupposes analysing the continuity of academic tradi-

tions, practices, and structures through historical upheavals. This is a challenging
task, as illustrated in Finland, for example, by the removal of the Royal Academy of
4 1 Introduction
Turku to Helsinki, the new capital, and transforming it into the Imperial Alexander
University in 1827. During this upheaval, the whole institution, in physical terms,
became a new institution. At the same time, however, all its academic traditions and
practices remained unchanged and even strengthened. Describing the development
of events and explaining the changes that take place in academic practices is a chal-
lenge, because practices can either continue, strengthen, or come to an end. Practices
can also continue under their former names, or they may be given new names. Or
they may be discontinued, even though officially they continue under their former
names. All this makes analysing historical continuities and discontinuities a
challenge.
I will respond to this intellectual challenge by discussing continuities and dis-
continuities from the point of view of historical layers. The starting point for this
analytical approach is the empirical observation that universities bring together a
mixture of different logics of actions (managerial vs. collegial), traditions (confer-
ment ceremonies vs. students’ carnival parties), established research methods and
practices (alone vs. in group) and teaching methods (lectures, seminars, laboratory
work), which may be either in conflict or in harmony with each other. These prac-
tices, values, and valuations have emerged and become established as academic
routines at different times and for various reasons.
Traditionally, when analysing the complexities of higher education institutions
(HEIs), a matrix organisation structure has been used where the organisational level
is shown on the vertical dimension and the disciplines are found on the horizontal
dimension (see Clark 1983). However, the problem with this approach is that it
lacks a temporal dimension, that is, how HEIs have developed over time. In histori-
cal institutionalism, the temporal dimension is represented by path dependencies,
path dependent meaning that contemporary and future actions of HEIs depend on
past experiences and past decisions. According to Thelen (1999), historical analysis
helps to understand why certain goals are emphasised over others and why there
may be different national responses to similar challenges. In this tradition, the idea
of historical layers (layering and sedimentation) has been used to explain, for exam-
ple, the conflict between policy reforms and traditional practices in the field of
higher education (see Christensen 2012; Streeck and Theelen 2005). However, his-
torical institutionalism ignores long-term historical developments, processes that
have started centuries ago and continue to influence universities’ present activities.
To my knowledge, as an analytical approach, historical layers have not been previ-
ously applied to explain the historical development of higher education in a nation
state.
The idea of layers is central in the archaeology of knowledge, developed by
Michel Foucault. The goal of this approach is to analyse the deepest strata of
Western culture and to understand the layers of thought, rather than to describe their
historical development (Foucault 2005). Anthony Giddens’s structuration theory,
for its part, explains how everyday practices develop into permanent structures of
action (Giddens 1984). The theory thus lends support to the idea that universities’
social structures and practices are layered and related to everyday practices.
However, Giddens does not discuss social phenomena from the point of view of
1.2 Historical Layers in Higher Education 5
historical development, but, rather, seeks to bridge the traditional sociological

agent-structure divide.
An analysis of historical layers helps not only to understand the conditions under
which a custom or a practice was born and how it has affected universities after that
but also to explain the mechanism of change (see also Saarinen and Välimaa 2012).
Metaphorically, historical layers can be compared to archaeological strata, or layers
of soil (sediment), which are accumulated one upon another and can be unearthed
to explore historical time. Of the archaeological strata, only the surface layer is vis-
ible: the period we are living in at the moment. However, this top layer rests on all
the cultural strata beneath it, reproducing their forms in different ways. Similarly,
over history, various academic and organisational customs, practices, and structures
have emerged, developed, and been cemented as every-day routines and traditions
at universities. They are not questioned – nor perhaps even should be – because they
make it easier for universities to take care of their various tasks. These routines,
academic traditions, and organisational structures and processes, in turn, are the
foundation on which new historical layers are built.
From a philosophical point of view, people are living in the present. Therefore,
we tend to remember only what is happening right now or what happened very
recently. It is much more difficult to perceive how present practices were started or
how we are constantly impacted by previous routines, structures, and behaviours.
These influences are difficult to see, because they have become part of (what is
considered) normal practice. Therefore, layers that have been accumulated gradu-
ally and unnoticed in every-day situations are hard to see. Universities are an espe-
cially interesting organisation as far as historical layers are concerned, because as
an institution, they have long continuity. At the same time, however, as organisa-
tions, they have been affected by local conditions and resources, academic tradi-
tions, educational reforms, international traditions, and even by pure chance and
coincidence. Researching universities is challenging, because the traditions and
legacies are deep-rooted and live strong. This, in turn, is not least because as rhetori-
cally skilled organisations, universities have learned how to use new, “politically
correct” concepts, even though in actual fact they have continued as before.
Specifically, universities are not like the other organisations with which they are
often compared. Universities are one of the oldest organisations still in operation in
Europe, not least because as social institutions, their tasks have largely remained
unchanged (Kerr 1972). Universities still have the same responsibilities (research,
teaching, granting degrees) as they had in the Middle Ages, and often even in exactly
the same facilities as centuries earlier. For this reason alone, they cannot be unequiv-
ocally categorised into any organisation type. At the same time, however, the social
environments of universities and their relationship with society have changed sev-
eral times. Therefore, they have been vested with new social tasks, without, how-
ever, being – or even trying to be – exempted from their old tasks. The continuity of
the core tasks and the growing number of new tasks universities have as an institu-
tion mean that new strata of research, teaching, and governance will continue to be
accumulated upon the previous organisational layers of higher education.
6 1 Introduction
In this book, the approach of historical layers is utilised metaphorically and as an

intellectual device which helps to understand the development of the seventeenth
century Swedish university into today’s Finnish higher education system. However,
as a historian, I would like to emphasise that my aim is not to use historical layers
as a hypothesis to be tested but as an intellectual device which helps to reflect on
continuities and discontinuities in and of Finnish higher education.
1.3 The Main Research Literature
Histories of European universities have been written almost as long as there have
been universities in Europe. This has to do with the fact that universities have always
attracted people for whom writing has been a natural way of construing the world.
The earliest histories, dating back to the Middle Ages, were mainly fanciful stories
of universities founded by heroes often borrowed from Greek mythology. However,
the first scientific studies on universities, by modern standards, were not made until
the eighteenth and especially the nineteenth century. A classic on the history of
medieval European universities is The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages,
written by Hastings Rashdall and published in the 1890s. Rashdall’s study is a mas-
terpiece, whose vivid style is undoubtedly one of the reasons why it was revised and
reissued in the 1930s and reprinted again in the 1960s and the 1970s. Other key
studies on medieval universities are Alan Cobban’s The Medieval Universities
(1975), The Medieval English Universities (1988), and English University Life in
the Middle Ages (1999).
The series A History of the University in Europe, edited by Hilde de Ridder-
Symeons and Walter Rüegg, is a seminal work on European universities. Written at
the request of rectors of European universities, the series seeks to retell and create a
common past for European universities (1992–2004).3 However, the series is the
best and most comprehensive treatise of the development of universities in Europe.
The most comprehensive study of the early phases of Finnish higher education, in
turn, is Jussi Nuorteva’s dissertation (1997) Suomalaisten ulkomainen opinkäynti
ennen Turun Akatemian perustamista 1640 (Finnish Study Abroad Before the
Foundation of the Royal Academy of Turku in 1640). The dissertation lists and dis-
cusses all Finnish students at foreign universities before 1640. Overall, however, the
most exhaustive treatise on the development of Finnish universities is the history of
the University of Helsinki, edited and also mostly written by Professor Matti Klinge.
This three-volume series starts from the founding of the Royal Academy of Turku
in 1640 and ends in the history of the University of Helsinki in the 1990s (Klinge
et al. 1987, 1989, 1990). One of the strengths of the trilogy is its cultural historical
approach and its examining not only changes in the university’s governance but also
3
The series was ordered by the Standing Conference of Rectors, Presidents and Vice-Chancellors
of the European Universities (CRE), which subsequently developed into the European University
Association (EUA).
1.4 The Scope and Method of the Study 7
the lives and activities of its students and professors. The trilogy thus discusses the
development of the university as part of society, even though the focus is strongly
on the academy. Apart from these, several histories have been written which deal
with Finnish universities during the time of independence. From the point of view
of this book, the most significant are the histories of the universities of Joensuu
(Nevala 2009), Oulu (Salo and Lackman 1998), and Jyväskylä (Einonen et al.
2009a, b). These give a good picture not only of the historical developments of the
universities but also of the factors that led to them. The histories of the University of
Technology (Nykänen 2007a, b) and Helsinki School of Economics (Michelsen
2001), in turn, shed light on the academic development of practical-utilitarian disci-
plines. Tero Halonen’s (2010) dissertation, for its part, examines the development of
academic professions.
However, not all Finnish universities have up-to-date histories. This is a draw-
back, because in addition to the general developments of universities, each univer-
sity and HEI should also understand its own past, the phases and challenges through
which it has evolved into the institution it is today. The development of higher edu-
cation as an institution and of the organisation responsible for it is always dependent
on local conditions and resources and on the goals of the surrounding society. These
are never completely identical, and therefore universities and higher education insti-
tutions by necessity differ from each other.
In addition to historical studies, I am also using sociological studies of education,
which often discuss the role of higher education in social reproduction. Typically,
these studies focus on students’ selection to and choice of higher education. Among
these, Sakari Ahola’s dissertation (1995) is especially valuable, because it provides
a historical perspective into Finnish higher education and its role in reproducing
social structures. Ahola’s study is based on Pierre Bourdieu’s social reproduction
theory (see Bourdieu 1984). Reproduction theory is a relatively popular approach
among Finnish higher education scholars not least because it focuses on the rela-
tionship and dynamics between higher education and society. The studies by Arto
Nevala (1999), Hanna Nori (2011), and Risto Rinne et al. (2008) have been inspired
by the same approach and provide valuable information on the relationship between
students’ socio-economic background and higher education.
To my knowledge, no general histories have been written on any European
nation’s higher education system. This is strange, given that comparative higher
education research repeatedly refers to different systems and models of higher edu-
cation. In this sense, the present book is opening a new research path.
1.4 The Scope and Method of the Study
A few words about the scope of this study. I will refer only cursorily to the major
developments of science, scholarship, and research. This is not to say that research,
scholarship, and science would not have had a significant role at universities and in
their development. Quite the contrary, because conceptions of knowledge, research,
8 1 Introduction
and science have always been at the very heart of universities. The main reason for
not paying more attention to the history of science is that such a history already
exists in Finland (Tommila 2000a, b, 2001, 2002), whereas a history of the entire
Finnish higher education system is still lacking.4 Thus, this book is to be a history
of the Finnish higher education system, rather than a history of academic sciences
and research. Also, my goal is not to write a defence for universities – even though
I am writing this book while serving as Professor at the University of Jyväskylä. My
position may be problematic, if looked at from the point of view of the positivist
ideal of science, because I am studying a phenomenon of which I myself am a part.
However, this same problem applies to all Finns making research into Finnish soci-
ety or culture or into the history of Finland. Admittedly, though, the risk of bias is
there. The scientific solution to this problem is the researcher’s self-reflection, his
being aware of his position in relation to the phenomenon under study. This has
been extensively discussed in both ethnological and sociological research (see
Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992; Eriksen 2001). Thus, the researcher needs to define
and establish as accurately as possible the sources and/or the theoretical points of
view on which he is basing his interpretations of the literature and source materials
he is using. In addition, a critical and reflective approach is helpful when making
use of the knowledge of the internal social dynamics of universities I have gained
while working in the academic world over 30 years. Within the field of academic
research, this study belongs to the tradition of qualitative inquiry, where a key goal
is to understand actions of humans, organisations, institutions, and societies
(Toulmin 1992).
The study focusses on the following three themes: (1) students and academics
(professors and other academic researchers and teachers); (2) changes in the
decision-making, administration, and governance of higher education institutions;
and (3) the relationship between higher education institutions and the surrounding
society.
Students are a most significant group, because analyses of their socio-economic
backgrounds reveal not only the role higher education plays in reproducing social
structures but also its significance and status in society. Focussing on scholars and
academics, in turn, helps to understand how teaching and research have been carried
out at universities. Analyses of university leadership, administration, and gover-
nance, again, open perspectives into how power is used at universities: how deci-
sions are made and by whom. This theme also sheds light on the relationship
between universities and society. Lastly, the laws and statutes enacted by state leg-
islatures not only reveal how those in power have wanted to have a say in university
affairs but also help to analyse how higher education is viewed in society. The third
and final theme is both the sum total of the other two themes and a question of its
4
In this book, a broad definition of science is used, according to which science includes both the
study of the physical and natural world and the study of society. The broad definition is common
in the continental tradition, the German notion Wissenschaft and the Finnish concept for science
(tiede) both encapsulating academic scholarship and (natural) scientific research.
1.4 The Scope and Method of the Study 9
own: How are higher education institutions related to the surrounding society and
its political events?
The book focusses on the transition periods of higher education and on their
causes and effects. In contrast, less attention will be paid to events and decades fol-
lowing the transition periods during which no major changes took place. More
detailed descriptions of these events and decades can be found in the histories of
universities and other higher education institutions.
Chapter 2
The Emergence of Universities
in the Middle Ages
Finnish higher education has its roots in Europe and its first universities. Therefore,
it is necessary to have a look at how the first universities emerged and what is
involved in the concept of universities.
2.1 The First Universities
It is impossible to give any exact date for the founding of Europe’s first universities
(such as Bologna, Paris, and Oxford). Strictly speaking, the universities were not
established officially but developed into such during the twelfth century through
internal, organic development, without any founding ceremonies. Therefore, rather
than trying to find the exact dates for the founding of the universities, it is more
important to remember that the university is a social innovation which was born in
Western Europe and which developed as a response to the challenges of the societies
of that time and to which all known universities today owe their existence.
According to historians, the time of the emergence of universities (the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries) coincided with a major medieval transition period in
Europe. According to Lehtonen, in Europe the transition “meant a shift in political
power structures, economic production and exchange, social powers, ecclesiastical
and religious life, and Latin and vernacular cultures” (Lehtonen 2001, p. 30). What
was relevant from the point of view of higher education was that the growing
appreciation of academic learning was grounded both in the changes in social power
structures – the strengthening of cities at the expense of princes in particular – and
in the change in ecclesiastical thinking within the Catholic Church. In instruction,
the focus shifted to language skills, languages, and rhetoric, whereas at monasteries,
traditional preservers of Western civilisation and classical culture, the emphasis had
been on serving God. Thus, in the twelfth century, a new rank of scholars was born
within the Catholic Church who did not belong to the clergy but were educated at
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 11

J. Välimaa, A History of Finnish Higher Education from the Middle Ages to the
21st Century, Higher Education Dynamics 52,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20808-0_2
12 2 The Emergence of Universities in the Middle Ages
the new institutions taking shape, universities. Specifically, the Catholic Church of
that time was not a unitary organisation but, rather, an umbrella organisation under
which there were several widely differing and even conflicting groups and goals.
Not surprisingly, theologians and lawyers educated at universities played an
important part in promoting theological uniformity and in developing the church as
an organisation (Lehmijoki-Gardner 2008; Lehtonen 2001; Mäkinen 2003).
The decision as to which university was “the first university in the world”
depends on the viewpoint. The University of Bologna can be considered the first
university, if “establishment” is understood as referring to students grouping into
nations. However, according to Rüegg (2003a), it was not until 1888 that the year
1088 was chosen as the university’s foundation date. Thus, in turn, was because the
Kingdom of Italy, which had been newly united, wanted to advertise its long
common heritage for political reasons. The university’s 800th anniversary offered
an excellent political opportunity to celebrate the new state. At the same time, Italy
wanted to make sure that no other university would be labelled “the first university
in the world”.1 However, the title of the world’s first university can be granted to the
University of Paris, if the criterion for establishment is students and teachers from
different fields forming a common corporation, or community. This is what
happened at Paris in 1208 (Rüegg 2003a). In actual fact, however, teaching at this
university – the most important medieval university for Finnish students – had
started at various cathedral schools in the twelfth century. As for the University of
Oxford, documents suggest that the first teachers of law started teaching at the
university in the 1180s. These three are usually regarded as the oldest universities.
What was common to all of them was that the teachers or masters (magister) tried
to create uniformity in the curricula and to strengthen the academic communities.
Notably, from the very beginning, it has been the masters and their students – the
academic community – who have formed the core of universities.
Most of the first universities developed organically, that is, they were initially
schools and then evolved into universities. However, this was not the only road to
becoming a university. In the thirteenth century, rulers started to establish universities
for which they sought recognition from the pope, who confirmed the rights of the
university by a charter of privileges (medieval operating licenses). This was because
in medieval societies the Catholic Church had monopoly over teaching and because
university studies mainly served the educational needs of the universal church. The
studies were a way to advance one’s career in the church. At the same time, also
autonomously developed institutions, studia generalia, or in legal terms, studia
generalia ex consuetudine (functioning by custom), started to seek charters of
1
The founding date of a university has symbolic, psychological and even political significance.
However, it is often difficult to decide on the founding dates of even younger universities. For
example, originally the foundation date of the University of Jyväskylä (in Finland) was set at 1934.
The rationale was that it was in this year that the Teacher Training Seminary, which had been
founded in 1863, became the College of Education. From the point of view of the functioning of
the University, however, 1863 is a more appropriate year, since it was in this year that teacher
education started in Jyväskylä. Besides, teacher education in Jyväskylä is still given in the same
area, albeit on a larger scale, with partly the same curriculum and teaching methods.
2.1 The First Universities 13
privileges mainly from the pope but sometimes also from the Holy Roman Emperor.2
This papal (or imperial or royal) charter gave the university authority that went
beyond that of local princes or cities. This protection by the church and/or secular
authorities helped both masters (professors) and students of universities in their
negotiations with municipal councils, bishops in dioceses, and castellans. In this
way, the protection gave the universities, or corporations of teachers and/or students,
a strong negotiating position over local authorities. At the same time, it also
increased the prestige of the instruction provided and studies accomplished at the
universities. For example, scholars in canon law graduating from the University of
Bologna had the right to represent the church everywhere in the Christian world (see
Verger 2003a). In effect, a great number of the medieval popes were lawyers in
canon law graduating from the University of Bologna. In modern terms, we could
say that in medieval society, the Catholic Church guaranteed the validity of degrees.
This was of high importance for the future of universities, since it strengthened their
position as universal institutions playing a central role in the development of the
Catholic Church. At the same time, however, popes, who granted the privileges, also
gained influence over university curricula and degrees.
As a result of these developments, university masters and doctors became part of
the spiritual estate, which had its own privileges and duties that differed from those
of laymen and were stipulated in canon law.3 Most students were also lower priests
in the Catholic Church and were supported by the church. What was relevant to
universities in this process was that those granting privileges recognised or had to
recognise the independent status and autonomy of the universities, that is, both their
right to make decisions about their own affairs and, for example, to exercise
jurisdiction over teachers and students (Cobban 1988; Rashdall 1936). This was of
great future importance, because students and teachers could only be judged
according to canon law in courts where the judges were university masters. In
addition, the judgements issued by canon law were milder than those issued by
secular courts (see Mäkinen 2003). In Finland, universities continued to exercise
jurisdiction over students and teachers up to the twentieth century. In addition,
historians have emphasised that universities were never ecclesiastical institutions,
even though throughout the Middle Ages they had a close relationship with the
Catholic Church (Schwinges 2003a).
2
For example, it was not until 1291 that the University of Paris obtained a charter of this kind
(Rüegg 2003a).
3
The rights of the spiritual estate were based on privilegium canonis, a statute which aimed at
protecting priests from secular authorities and against laymen. The most important outcome of this
privilege was that all crimes committed by the spiritual estate had to be dealt with in ecclesiastical
courts, because according to canon law, only a priest could judge another priest. In agreement with
this principle, students and scholars could only be judged by canonical courts, where the judges
were university masters.
2.2 Differences Between Studia Generalia and Studia

Particularia
It is hard to fully understand medieval developments if they are only looked at from
the perspective of modern educational systems, because differences between
medieval educational institutions were rather the result of organic development than
of administrative decisions by secular rulers. At the beginning of the Middle Ages,
educational institutions were often referred to by the term studium, which was a
generic term encompassing two types of schools for advanced study: studium
particulare and studium generale. The latter developed into universities, the former
did not. However, the difference between studia particularia and studia generalia is
not straightforward, because the schools themselves were necessarily not different.
The difference emerged gradually, over time (see Cobban 1975). In the term studium
generale, studium denotes a school which was qualified to provide advanced
instruction. It thus had a sufficient number of masters who could teach in at least
one but usually even several academic disciplines. These included the faculty of
liberal arts (septem artes liberales), in addition to which (or sometimes instead of
which) the studium may also have had a law faculty (law of the Catholic Church or
canon law, or civil law, or both) or a theological, or a medical faculty. The term
generale, for its part, suggests that the school could attract students from beyond the
local region or diocese. Thus, generale did not refer to a more general or broader
curriculum, but to the reputation of the institution and its ability to attract students
from a wider area. In turn, a school which lacked this ability was called a studium
particulare. However, according to Cobban (1988), there is no widely accepted
definition as to how wide that attraction had to be for a school to be called a studium
generale. Usually, it meant that the students came from abroad, for example, from
Italy and France. Yet, it could also refer to a narrower catch – that the students came
from within the country, as was the case, for example, in Oxford. What was relevant
was that the attraction was recognised by scholars and students. In modern terms it
means that studium generale had a good academic reputation. Towards the end of
the Middle Ages, by the late fifteenth century, the term studium generale gradually
gave way to another term, universitas, which was little by little established as the
term denoting universities.
In principle and in practice, the development of medieval universities into uni-
versities was the result of students and teachers getting unionised, to use modern
terminology. Guilds were a typical form of social organisation in medieval society,
and therefore it was also adopted at universities. Being a member of a guild (or a
comparable corporation) was a necessity, because guilds were in a position to
protect university teachers and students, many of whom were foreigners and
therefore not protected by city or state laws. At the same time, guilds regulated their
members’ lives, helped them in social affairs and protected them in case of accidents.
Members of guilds were also united by common moral rules. Being a member of a
guild was not based on a contract, but an oath, which was a very strong social tie in
the Middle Ages, even stronger than that of being a citizen of a city-state. Rashdall
2.3 Bologna and Paris as the Archetypes of Universities 15
(1936) gives an example: in Italian city-states, the Guelphs and Ghibellines, rival
parties aiming at changing city-states, were organised into guilds. Since oaths were
binding, guilds not only exerted a great impact on their members but also became
strong organisations capable of protecting their members’ interests.
What was also relevant for the development of universities was that the first com-
munities (guilds and other corporations) emerged in Italian city-states and that these
communities borrowed legal corporate principles from these city-states and made
them part of their own statutes. In addition, the development of universities was sup-
ported by the fact that a great number of the statutes regulating teachers’ and stu-
dents’ life and activities at the University of Bologna and their academic forms were
also adopted at Paris. The impact of these “model” universities spread through stu-
dents and professors to all other universities (Rashdall 1936). This was only natural
because students came to Bologna and Paris from all over Europe. In this way, the
social forms of the first universities and the idea of a university started to spread
across Europe. Among the key elements of the first universities were that they were
organised into faculties and their students (and teachers) into nations (natio), that
they provided course-based learning, and that they shared the same academic degrees
and curricula and more or less the same ways of teaching (Rüegg 2003a, p. 31).
According to Rüegg, another reason why the Universities of Paris and Bologna
came to be regarded as models for other universities has to do with the medieval
concept of reformatio. Specifically, the first universities aimed at restoring
(re-formare) the idea of a true and original of university. This same goal – restoring
the true and original university – was then followed at the new universities that were
founded throughout Europe, even though each university, in the end, developed its
own version of the models of Bologna and Paris (Rüegg 2003a).
Throughout history, it has been customary for new universities to follow the lead
of traditional and prestigious universities. This same symbolic integration – or
imitating the “best” universities – still characterises universities today.
2.3 Bologna and Paris as the Archetypes of Universities
Universities have often been examined through governance. Traditionally, the divi-
sion has been into two archetypes of universities, as Rashdall (1936) calls them: the
Universities of Bologna and Paris. The University of Bologna represents the arche-
type of student-controlled universities, where a guild of students hired masters to
teach them. Paris, again, was the archetype of master-controlled universities.
Bologna was known as a significant law university, whereas Paris was the most
famous medieval theological university.
The development of the Bologna archetype was largely the result of the unique
conditions in the thirteenth century city-state of Bologna. Among these, some of the
most important were the great number of foreign students in Bologna and the need
of doctors living in Bologna to protect their livelihood. Foreign students did not
have the same rights as citizens of Bologna, and this caused tensions. Therefore,
guilds of students became more powerful than guilds of teachers, which did not
have an equal need to protect the interests of the foreign teachers. In addition, the
fathers of the city of Bologna found it more advantageous to focus on the students,
who provided considerable income for the city (e.g., revenues from rents and selling
food). As a result, foreign students were given the same rights that were enjoyed by
those students who were citizens of Bologna.
On the basis of their places of origin, the students of the University of Bologna
were grouped into four corporations or nations (natio), of which the German nation
(natio Germanica) was the best known and strongest. At medieval universities it
was very common to group students and teachers on the basis of their place of origin
(the familia structure). The communities of students (often guilds), for their part,
elected the university rector, who had authority over the students and teachers. They
also hired doctors from Bologna to teach them, which laid the foundation for
continuity in instruction. The teachers, again, were organised into their own
communities. However, as emphasised by Rashdall (1936), even in this model the
students had no say as to who could be a member of a teacher guild. Likewise, as
reminded by Verger (2003a), a large number of the students at Bologna were adult
males from the highest layers of society, many of whom were already functioning
as officials. This was also typical of other legally-oriented universities (Schwinges
2003a). Thus, thanks to their social position and status, adult male law students
were vested with considerable power. At Paris, on the other hand, the students were
younger and often served as clerics (clericus) in the Catholic Church, from which
they also received stipends (prebenda). In addition, according to Cobban, the
students in the south differed from their northern counterparts not only in age but
also in attitudes. Law students at Italian universities were older men and tended to
regard university studies as services that could be hired and used by consumers as
any other services. Northern European and English students, for their part, tended to
be younger and content with their position as academic apprentices. (Cobban 1999).
In practice, the difference between the universities of Paris and Bologna was not
as significant, because at Paris, the students of the higher faculties (law, medicine
and theology) were baccalaureates or masters who already had a lower university
degree from the arts faculty. They were thus men who had studied at least 7 years
(Schwinges 2003a; Verger 2003a).
Organisationally, however, the University of Paris was the opposite of the
University of Bologna: it was the archetype of master-controlled universities, where
masters took on students as their apprentices and often even lived with them in lodg-
ing houses or at colleges. The development of the University of Paris was largely
determined by local conditions. Most notably, at Paris masters started to teach at
various monastic schools in the twelfth century, whereas no such link with the
church developed at Bologna. Among the best known of the schools of Paris were
Notre Dame, Saint Genevieve, and Saint Victor. At Paris, the masters were members
of the church and thus part of the clergy, which meant that they were under the pro-
tection of the church and under the jurisdiction of their superiors in the church.
Thus, they had to obtain the license to teach from the chancellor of the Cathedral of
Paris, who, in turn, tried to have his say on the curriculum. However, the teachers
2.3 Bologna and Paris as the Archetypes of Universities 17
could not practice teaching without belonging to a masters’ guild. When resolving
this discrepancy, the king of France sided with and supported the teachers in order
to strengthen his own position vis-à-vis the church (Rüegg 2003a). In the early-
thirteenth century, the tension between the chancellor of the cathedral church grant-
ing the license to teach and the masters controlling the practice of teaching escalated
into conflicts. This ultimately led to the birth of a strong university dominated by a
guild of masters. Thus, at Paris, it was the masters who were in control, electing, for
example, the rector, contrary to what was the case at Bologna. The election of the
rector was of great significance, since it was the rector who not only represented the
corporation of teachers (in other words, the university) but was also its highest exec-
utive official. In addition, the rector was elected by votes as established in statutes
and represented the university in its relations with society.4 The primary symbol of
the university was the seal, which encapsulated both the university’s legal right to
make contracts and its right to exercise jurisdiction over its students and teachers.
At the University of Paris, decisions were made by voting by faculty. The most
important faculty was the artes liberales or arts faculty (or the Faculty of Liberal
Arts, or Humanities), because it had the greatest number of teachers and therefore
also the most power. In the academic hierarchy of universities, however, the arts
faculty was the lowest faculty. All masters at the University of Paris were members
of a faculty guild, and each master also belonged to a nation (natio). In the faculties,
decisions were made by voting by nation. At Paris, there were four nations.5 Three
of these, that is, the Gallians (natio Gallicana), the Picardians (natio Picardica,)
and the Normans (natio Normannorum), were French, even though in the Picard
nation, there were also masters from the Dioceses of Liège and Utrecht (the Low
Countries). The fourth nation (natio Anglicana) consisted of masters coming from
outside France. Also Finnish students belonged to this nation. In the fifteenth
century, the name of this nation was changed to the German nation (natio
Germanica), because owing to the Hundred Years’ War between England and
France, there were very few English students in Paris (Nuorteva 1997).
According to Cobban (1988), there were several versions and mixed forms of
these two models in Europe, because most universities combined elements of both
archetypes for their local purposes. Because of the corporate and collegial structure
of guilds, university rectors were representatives of organisations. However, the
power of the rectors varied across universities and over time. One significant
difference between the continental and English universities was that on the continent
the chancellor was often nominated by the ruler and represented and wielded power
within the university, whereas on the British Isles the chancellor was always elected
by masters and represented the university in social relations (Cobban 1988).
4
Together with rectors, bedells, or beadles or assistants of teachers, can be regarded as the oldest
social institution of higher education. Included in the tasks of the bedells were, among others, car-
rying the masters’ books, opening and shutting classroom doors and informing about studies and
studying (Rashdall 1936).
5
This number is the same as that of the student nations at the University of Bologna. In addition,
according to Rashdall (1936), the statutes of Paris and Bologna shared many points in common.
The corporative nature and the institutional autonomy of universities were a key
factor, because irrespective of the people involved, the corporations had a common
interest, that of protecting their rights. Universities were thus independent of the
personalities of the teachers or students or of any single donor or religious doctrine;
they had their own institutional will (Verger 2003a). Of course, this does not mean
that the donors would not have had any say in university affairs. Money was power
in the Middle Ages too. However, instead of the donors one-sidedly dictating their
conditions, it was more a matter of negotiating, because rulers and the church
needed scholars for their service. Universities, for their part, stuck to their academic
and institutional autonomy (Rüegg 2003a; Verger 2003a).
Throughout the Middle Ages, universities were regarded as one of the three pil-
lars sustaining Catholic Christendom. These pillars were sacerdotium, imperium,
and studium. The power of the pope (sacerdotium) was spiritual power and drew on
the pope’s status as the successor to the apostle Peter. The emperor’s power (impe-
rium) was secular power and was seen as decreed by God. The power of scholars
and universities (studium), again, was intellectual power and rested on the scholars’
ability to judge truths by using the scholastic method. Intellectual power was not
only abstract power but often manifested itself as very concrete political authority in
Christianity’s spiritual and secular questions (Nuorteva 1997; Rüegg 2003a).
2.4 The Relationship Between Universities and Cities
Historians have had different conceptions as to which factors ultimately led to the
emergence of universities. At one extreme is the idealistic view, according to which
it was the thirst for knowledge and love of truth (amor sciendi) of scholars and
students that gave birth to the universities. At the other extreme is the Marxist view,
which emphasises that universities responded to the needs of the bourgeoisie and
the elite, who wanted to strengthen their own social control. And in the middle is the
conception according to which the emergence of universities was mainly due,
neither to social needs nor to a thirst for academic knowledge, but to a process
where society and universities have both had an influence on each other. I find this
golden middle way the most fruitful way of looking at the relationship between
universities and society (See Rüegg 2003a).
Rashdall (1936) explains the emergence of the University of Bologna by the fact
that in Lombard, the tradition of Roman law continued uninterrupted. In social life,
this meant not only a continuation of antiquity but also that throughout the Middle
Ages there was in the city-states of Lombard a need for those versed in Roman law.
Specifically, in Roman law, legal categories had been developed which helped to
define the relationship between public and private persons. From the point of view
of the development of universities this meant that there was in Lombard a constant
need to teach Roman law. In addition, it just happened to be so that one of the
famous teachers of Roman law (Irnerius) and his follower (Gratian) lived and
worked in Bologna, not at any other competing law school of Lombard or, for
2.4 The Relationship Between Universities and Cities 19
example, in Modena or Padua. The reputation of the teachers at Bologna started to

attract students to Bologna, not only from the surrounding city-states but also from
beyond the Alps, from the areas of Germany, France, and England. This flow of
students provided the teachers with a more secure income and the city with wealth,
with more and more students and teachers coming to live in Bologna. Bologna was
situated along a major pilgrimage and commercial route from the north to Rome. At
the same time, the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand I took Bologna law students
under his protection in order to strengthen his own power. For the city of Bologna,
this meant that it had to limit the privileges of university teachers and students and,
at the same time, to guarantee them conditions that would ensure that they would
not move to any of the competing cities. As a consequence of these tensions, the city
of Bologna made agreements with the guilds (universitas) of students and secured
to foreign students and teachers the same rights as had been enjoyed by citizens of
Bologna. This took place by the mid-thirteenth century as a result of various tensions
and their resolutions (Rüegg 2003a; Verger 2003a).
A similar cumulative process – the city attracting more and more students and
teachers – also took place in Paris, where teaching was mainly provided at monastic
schools. Among the renowned teachers at Paris were, among others, Hugh of Saint
Victor and Pierre Abelard and, in the twelfth century, Peter Lombard and Peter
Cantor. Gradually, the flow of teachers to Paris grew so big that the city became the
first city of teachers the medieval world had known. At the same time, the number
of subjects taught at the university increased. These developments made it necessary
to organise the students and teachers into guilds (or corporations), as was customary
in the Middle Ages. The increase in the number of teachers and students created the
need to organise the relationship of students and teachers with the city (Rashdall
1936).
One example of the tensions between the local authorities and the university is
the sermon given by Philip of Greve, Chancellor of Paris (1218–1236), where he
criticised the newly established University of Paris as follows:
In the old days, when each master taught for himself and the name of University was
unknown, lectures and disputations were more frequent and there was more zeal for study.
But now that you are united into a University, lectures are rare, things are hurried, and little
is learned, the time taken from lectures being spent in meetings and discussions. In these
assemblies, while the older heads are deliberating and legislating, the younger spend their
time hatching the most abominable schemes and planning their nocturnal raids (Rashdall
1936, p. 298, vol. I).
Universities often collaborated with cities in controlling, for example, the pricing
of students’ and teachers’ lodging and food and in deciding on the laws governing
foreign students and teachers. This was because students and teachers could fre-
quently not be judged by the same laws as local citizens, since they were often for-
eigners, as was the case, for example, in Bologna. The solution was to vest
universities with judicial power, or the right to handle cases concerning their teach-
ers and students in canon courts, the members of which were representatives of the
church (e.g., university masters). However, establishing these relationships was not
unproblematic but often led to controversies before a solution could be reached.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
potest implere, sciat se ille filius contra legem fecisse» (M. G. H., Leges, III, p.
286.) Il y a eu de multiples applications de ce principe dans la légende et dans
l'histoire: par exemple, Grégoire de Tours, ii, 41; iii, 18; Vita sancti Theodorici
Abbatis (Mabillon, Acta Sanct., I. p. 599), et Flodoard, Historia Remensis ecclesiæ,
i, c. 24. Cf. Histoire poétique des Mérovingiens, pp. 296 et 503.
«Pendant que le roi Clovis demeurait à Paris, il fit dire en secret au
fils de Sigebert:
«—Voilà que ton père est vieux et qu'il boite. S'il venait à mourir, tu
hériterais de son royaume et tu deviendrais notre ami.»
«Enflammé d'ambition, le jeune prince médita de tuer son père.
Comme celui-ci, sorti de Cologne, avait passé le Rhin pour se
promener dans la forêt de Buchonie, son fils lui dépêcha des
assassins, qui l'égorgèrent pendant qu'il dormait à midi sous sa
tente. Il se flattait ainsi de devenir le maître de son royaume. Mais,
par le jugement de Dieu, il tomba lui-même dans la fosse qu'il avait
creusée pour son père. Il fit mander à Clovis la mort du vieux roi,
ajoutant:
«—Mon père est mort, et je suis en possession de son trésor et de
son royaume. Envoyez-moi des hommes de confiance, à qui je
remettrai de plein gré la part qui vous conviendra de ses richesses.»
Clovis lui fit répondre:
«—Je te remercie de ta bonne volonté, et je te prie de montrer ton
trésor à mes envoyés; tu le garderas ensuite tout entier.»
«Chlodéric, aussitôt les envoyés de Clovis arrivés, leur exhiba tout le
trésor paternel. Pendant qu'ils examinaient divers objets, il leur dit:
«—Voici un coffre où mon père avait l'habitude d'entasser des
pièces d'or.
«—Plongez la main jusqu'au fond, dirent les envoyés, et ramenez
tout.»
«Pendant que Chlodéric, profondément incliné sur le coffre, se
mettait en devoir de leur obéir, l'un d'eux, levant sa hache, lui brisa la
tête. Et ainsi le parricide expia ce qu'il avait fait à son père. Clovis,
apprenant que Sigebert avait péri et son fils également, vint à
Cologne, rassembla tout le peuple, et dit:
«—Écoutez ce qui est arrivé. Pendant que je naviguais sur l'Escaut,
Chlodéric, fils de mon parent, poursuivait son père et faisait courir le
bruit que je voulais le faire assassiner. Et pendant que le vieux roi
fuyait par la forêt de Buchonie, il lui envoya des assassins qui le
mirent à mort. Lui-même périt massacré, je ne sais par qui, pendant
qu'il ouvrait le trésor paternel. Pour moi, je n'ai aucune complicité
dans ces actes; je sais que ce serait un crime de verser le sang de
mes proches. Mais puisque le mal est fait, je vous donne un conseil
dont vous vous trouverez bien, si vous le suivez; soumettez-vous à
moi, et vous serez sous ma protection.»
«Le peuple applaudit à ces paroles, en faisant entendre des
acclamations et en entrechoquant les boucliers, éleva Clovis sur le
pavois et en fit son souverain. Celui-ci prit possession du royaume
de Sigebert et mit la main sur son trésor[215].»
[215] Grégoire de Tours, ii, 40.
Les contradictions et surtout les énormes invraisemblances de cette
tradition populaire crèvent les yeux. Elles s'expliquent dans un récit
qui a passé par beaucoup de bouches avant d'être mis par écrit,
mais il est indispensable de les signaler pour fixer la vraie valeur de
la narration. Si le roi de Cologne a été tué pendant qu'il se promenait
dans la Buchonie, pourquoi est-il dit un peu plus loin qu'il fuyait
devant son fils Chlodéric? Si c'est celui-ci qui est le meurtrier, qui a
dit à la tradition populaire qu'il ait agi à l'instigation de Clovis? Et si
Clovis a voulu plus tard se débarrasser de Chlodéric par un meurtre,
est-il sérieux de prétendre qu'il l'aurait fait assassiner dans son
propre palais, et par des ambassadeurs? Enfin, à supposer qu'il ait
réellement commis une pareille trahison, comment croire que le
peuple ripuaire se serait laissé persuader qu'il en était innocent? En
contredisant d'une manière si éclatante l'opinion qu'elle attribue aux
Ripuaires, la tradition ne se démasque-t-elle pas comme une
légende postérieure et sans autorité? Toutes ces invraisemblances
sans doute ne choquaient pas l'esprit populaire à l'époque où
écrivait Grégoire de Tours, mais elles dénoncent le récit à la critique
moderne, et nous forcent à reconnaître ici le travail inconscient de la
poésie, non les souvenirs exacts de l'histoire.
Qu'il nous soit permis d'inviter le lecteur à nous suivre pour quelques
instants dans l'atelier de la critique, où une analyse méthodique du
récit qu'il vient d'entendre nous permettra peut-être de le ramener à
ses éléments constitutifs et de nous rendre compte de sa formation.
En éliminant tous les détails légendaires, nous rencontrons au
centre de celui-ci un noyau vraiment historique: la mort tragique des
deux rois de Cologne. Sigebert et Chlodéric vivaient encore en 507;
en 511, tous deux étaient disparus, et Clovis régnait à leur place. Ce
double drame a vivement préoccupé l'imagination populaire; elle a
voulu en savoir la cause, et elle n'a pas manqué d'en trouver une qui
la satisfît. «Cherche à qui le crime profite,» telle est la règle qui
guide l'esprit des foules dans la recherche du coupable. Or le seul
qui eût intérêt à faire périr Sigebert, c'est celui qui devait être son
héritier, et Chlodéric s'est vu ainsi transformé en parricide de par la
rigoureuse logique de l'épopée. Peut-être celle-ci aurait hésité à
charger sa mémoire d'un crime aussi monstrueux, si la fin précoce et
tragique de ce prince n'avait été une preuve de sa culpabilité. Car il
est un autre axiome non moins cher à la logique populaire, et que
l'épopée consacre tous les jours dans ses tableaux, c'est que tout
crime s'expie dès ici-bas par la loi du talion. Ils sont innombrables,
les personnages historiques dont la tradition a noirci la mémoire,
simplement parce qu'ils ont été malheureux, et qu'on n'a pu
expliquer leur malheur autrement que par leurs fautes. Si Chlodéric
a péri de bonne heure et d'une mort cruelle, c'est qu'il avait mérité ce
châtiment, c'est qu'il était l'auteur de la catastrophe mystérieuse qui
avait emporté son père. Mais la mort de Chlodéric lui-même, à qui
profitait-elle, sinon à Clovis, qui devint grâce à elle le roi des
Ripuaires? Encore une fois donc, dans cette imagination populaire
qui ne peut pas se résigner à laisser quelque part aux éléments
fortuits, c'est Clovis qui a fait périr Chlodéric, et qui est devenu ainsi
l'exécuteur des justes vengeances d'un Dieu irrité[216].
[216] Je crois devoir rappeler au lecteur que je me borne à résumer ici les
considérations développées dans l'Histoire poétique des Mérovingiens, pp. 293-
302.
Tel est le procédé poétique par lequel, remontant des effets aux
causes et raisonnant d'après les lois d'une logique simple et
rigoureuse, l'imagination populaire est arrivée à s'expliquer toute
cette série d'événements. Une ambition criminelle a poussé un
prince royal au parricide; mais la justice divine fait marcher la
vengeance sur les traces du crime, et succomber le coupable sous
les coups de son heureux successeur.
Ainsi, l'évolution est complète. Le fait inexpliqué, tombé dans
l'imagination épique comme une graine dans le sol, y a germé,
grandi, et s'est peu à peu ramifié de la manière qu'on vient de voir.
Le peuple possède maintenant une explication satisfaisante de
l'avènement de Clovis au trône des Ripuaires. Certes, l'épopée
aurait pu s'arrêter ici. Mais, une fois en voie d'explication, elle va
jusqu'au bout. Elle a entrevu une possibilité, c'est que l'artificieux
Clovis, en vue d'amener le dénouement dont il devait profiter, ait lui-
même provoqué le crime de Chlodéric. Et voilà l'histoire qui entre
dans une nouvelle phase, racontant comment le roi des Saliens
arme un fils contre son père, et les pousse tous les deux dans la
tombe pour hériter de l'un et de l'autre. Que Clovis soit de la sorte
transformé en un perfide et sanguinaire intrigant, cela importe peu.
Les milieux où se sont élaborées ces légendes étaient trop barbares
pour se rendre compte qu'ils le diminuaient en le peignant sous de
telles couleurs; ils admiraient la ruse quand elle avait réussi, et
estimaient doublement le héros qui joignait au courage intrépide les
ressources d'un esprit ingénieux et délié. Ne nous étonnons donc
pas de la physionomie atroce que nous trouvons à Clovis chaque
fois que nous le rencontrons dans les récits populaires: ses
admirateurs barbares l'ont fait à leur image.
Si maintenant on veut bien accorder à la critique le droit qu'on a
laissé pendant quatorze siècles à la poésie, et lui permettre de
reconstituer à son tour l'histoire telle qu'elle a dû se passer, nous
formulerons nos conclusions comme suit. Le fait historique jeté en
pâture aux imaginations des barbares du sixième siècle, c'est
l'assassinat mystérieux du roi Sigebert dans la forêt de Buchonie,
qui eut lieu vraisemblablement dans l'automne de 507. A la nouvelle
de sa mort, son fils Chlodéric, qui, peut-être, était encore occupé au
fond de l'Aquitaine à combattre les Visigoths, accourut à la hâte;
mais il périt lui-même au milieu des troubles qu'avait provoqués la
mort de son père. Ce double meurtre rendait vacant le trône des
Ripuaires, et Clovis se présenta pour recueillir la succession de ses
deux parents. Comme il était le plus proche, peut-être le seul héritier
légitime, qu'il avait assez de puissance pour s'imposer, et que les
Ripuaires étaient honorés de mettre à leur tête un souverain si
illustre, il fut acclamé avec enthousiasme, et élevé sans retard sur le
pavois. Le trône de Cologne sera devenu vacant vers 508, et la
nouvelle que Clovis en aura reçue à Bordeaux ne doit pas avoir
contribué pour peu à son brusque retour vers le Nord.
Qu'on ne s'étonne pas de la hardiesse de ces conjectures, et de
l'énormité des amputations qu'avec le scalpel de la critique nous
venons de faire au récit traditionnel. Il faut s'être rendu compte, par
une étude assidue, des prodigieuses altérations que l'esprit épique
fait subir à l'histoire, pour reconnaître que nous n'avons pas abusé
de la liberté de l'hypothèse. Dans l'histoire poétique de Gondebaud
et de Clotilde, le résidu historique représente vis-à-vis de la légende
une proportion plus faible encore, et nul ne se serait avisé d'aller
dans la voie des négations aussi loin que les faits constatés nous
ont menés presque à notre insu.
L'annexion du royaume des Ripuaires couronnait la carrière
conquérante du fils de Childéric. Maintenant, tous les peuples de
race franque se trouvaient réunis sous sa loi. Les bases étaient
jetées d'un vaste empire qui, ayant la Gaule pour centre, rayonnerait
peu à peu sur le reste de l'Europe occidentale et centrale. En
attendant, Clovis se trouvait être le roi le plus puissant de la
chrétienté. Son autorité était reconnue depuis le Wahal jusqu'aux
Pyrénées. Il était parvenu à faire ce que l'Empire avait en vain
essayé à tant de reprises: imposer une même autorité à la Gaule et
à la Germanie. Ce fut un résultat immense, car l'action et la réaction
de ces deux pays l'un sur l'autre, pendant les premiers siècles, c'est,
en quelque sorte, le meilleur de leur histoire et de l'histoire de
l'Europe. Leur coexistence séculaire sous la même dynastie jusqu'au
traité de Verdun, en 843, leur a imprimé un cachet de parenté
indélébile qu'elles ont conservé après dix siècles d'existence
séparée. D'autre part, la Ripuarie fut la réserve du peuple franc. Il
viendra un jour, dans les annales de ce grand peuple, où le rameau
salien paraîtra desséché, et où l'on pourra croire que la Gaule est
prête à retomber dans l'anarchie. Alors surgiront les héros qui
donneront à la nation sa seconde dynastie, celle des Pépins et des
Charles, enfants du pays ripuaire. Ils continueront l'œuvre
commencée par les Saliens, ils réapprendront aux Francs le chemin
des expéditions victorieuses, et Charlemagne sera le nouveau
Clovis. En effet, si l'Empire d'Occident se trouve achevé le jour où le
pape Léon III posa la couronne impériale sur la tête du fils de Pépin,
il ne faut pas oublier qu'il a été commencé pendant les années où
Soissons, Toulouse et Cologne passaient tour à tour, avec leurs
royaumes, sous l'autorité du héros mérovingien.
VI
LE CONCILE D'ORLÉANS
Comme on l'a vu dans les chapitres précédents, l'histoire ne nous a
conservé de Clovis que le souvenir de ses principaux faits d'armes,
souvent fort défigurés par la tradition populaire, et quelques
épisodes de sa vie privée, qui n'ont pas moins souffert. Et c'est tout.
Son action politique, son rôle de législateur, de diplomate et
d'homme d'Etat nous échappent entièrement. L'attention des
contemporains ne se portait pas sur ces sujets austères et abstrus;
ce qui les passionnait, c'était le héros seul, et non les destinées
collectives dont il avait la responsabilité. A leurs yeux, l'histoire de la
fondation du royaume franc se résumait dans la biographie du roi.
Nous devrions donc terminer ici l'histoire de Clovis, si nous en
demandions les éléments à ceux-là seuls qui se sont attribué la
mission de nous la raconter. Heureusement il y a eu, à côté des
annalistes, un témoin qui avait au plus haut degré, avec le souci des
intérêts généraux, celui d'en léguer le souvenir à la postérité.
L'Église, dès son origine, avait pris l'habitude de consigner par écrit
tout ce qui se passait de mémorable dans son sein, et elle
conservait avec soin les documents qui rendaient témoignage de
ses œuvres. Quelques pages des archives qu'elle tenait au sixième
siècle en Gaule nous permettent d'envisager, une fois au moins, le
fondateur de la monarchie franque sous un autre aspect que celui du
guerrier armé de la francisque et combattant à la tête de son armée.
Nous apprenons d'abord, par une circulaire royale adressée à tous
les évêques du royaume, qu'après la guerre d'Aquitaine, le roi,
obéissant à des préoccupations toutes chrétiennes, s'efforça de
soulager autant qu'il était en son pouvoir les souffrances des
populations qui avaient été le plus éprouvées. L'édit par lequel, on
s'en souvient, il avait pris sous sa protection spéciale les personnes
et les biens de l'Église avait été violé en plus d'une rencontre;
d'autre part, le droit de la guerre avait sévi avec toute sa rigueur, et
quantité de prisonniers avaient été entraînés hors de leur pays dans
toutes les provinces du royaume. Il y avait donc, maintenant que la
lutte était terminée, un double devoir à remplir: assurer force de loi
aux généreuses dispositions du monarque, et faciliter le libre
exercice des droits de la charité. En conséquence, une nouvelle
circulaire fut adressée aux évêques, dans laquelle le roi leur
rappelait la protection qu'il avait accordée aux églises, en déclarant
qu'il leur appartenait de s'en prévaloir. Toute personne
ecclésiastique, religieuse, veuve, clerc ou fils de clerc, ou serf
d'église, si elle avait été faite captive contrairement à la paix du roi,
c'est-à-dire aux dispositions indiquées ci-dessus, devait être rendue
sans retard à la liberté: il suffisait pour cela que son évêque la
réclamât dans une lettre scellée de son sceau, et sous la foi du
serment. Cette dernière condition, disait Clovis, était imposée par
son peuple, à raison des fraudes nombreuses auxquelles donnait
lieu la faveur royale. Quant aux laïques faits prisonniers en dehors
de la paix du roi, c'est-à-dire qui n'avaient pas été mis sous sa
protection spéciale, l'évêque pouvait, s'il le trouvait bon, donner à qui
il voulait mission de les racheter[217].
[217] Sirmond, Concilia Galliæ, t. I, p. 176; Boretius, Capitularia regum francorum,
t. I, p. 1.
Cette lettre, on n'en peut pas douter, provoqua un grandiose
mouvement de rachat. Tout le pays franc fut sillonné de mandataires
épiscopaux allant jusque dans les cantons les plus reculés, soit
réclamer des prisonniers injustement détenus, soit offrir l'or de
l'Église pour rendre la liberté aux captifs. Il y eut sans doute des
prélats qui voulurent faire eux-mêmes leur tournée de rédemption,
comme saint Epiphane de Pavie, et l'on peut croire que plus d'un, se
conformant aux recommandations des conciles, suivit l'exemple de
Césaire d'Arles et vendit les vases sacrés de son église pour
racheter des chrétiens prisonniers. Nous savons de même, par la
Vie de saint Eptade, que ce simple prêtre déploya une admirable
activité dans ce rôle de libérateur, et qu'il fit tomber les fers d'une
multitude de captifs disséminés dans toutes les provinces[218]. Ainsi
l'Église marchait sur les pas de l'État pour fermer les blessures qu'il
avait faites, et pour atténuer par sa charité des maux qu'elle n'avait
pu empêcher.
[218] Voir ci-dessus.
L'édit que nous venons d'analyser est le seul qui nous reste de
Clovis: il est digne d'ouvrir la série des actes officiels de la
monarchie très chrétienne. N'est-il pas instructif, tout au moins, de
constater qu'au moment où la légende le montre fendant la tête de
ses proches et ourdissant contre eux les plus viles intrigues,
l'histoire authentique nous initie aux nobles préoccupations qui
dictent sa circulaire aux évêques? Si des documents de ce genre
nous avaient été conservés en plus grand nombre pour le règne de
Clovis, dans quelle autre lumière nous apparaîtrait ce personnage,
et avec quelle netteté supérieure se dessinerait son histoire pleine
d'ombres et de lacunes!
Hâtons-nous d'ajouter, toutefois, que nous possédons encore un
autre acte, plus important et plus solennel, où le roi civilisateur
s'affirme dans la plénitude de son activité royale, je veux dire les
canons du concile d'Orléans, réuni par son ordre en l'an 511.
L'importance de cette assemblée est considérable. Les conciles,
c'était pour l'Église l'instrument par excellence de gouvernement et
de législation. Après les guerres, les invasions, les conquêtes,
l'établissement définitif des Visigoths au sud et des Francs au nord,
après tant de troubles et de désordres qui avaient ébranlé les
assises de la vie publique, il était temps que l'Église des Gaules se
ressaisît. Le concile d'Orléans marque le retour d'une vitalité
régulière et tranquille dans ce grand corps, dont l'organe principal
recommence à fonctionner librement. En renouant la chaîne de la
tradition conciliaire, l'épiscopat franc faisait œuvre de régénération
sociale et politique à la fois.
Le concile d'Orléans n'eut pas le caractère des conciles ordinaires
qui se réunissaient périodiquement, en conformité des canons,
autour d'un même métropolitain. En d'autres termes, ce ne fut pas
un concile provincial, mais un concile national, auquel furent
convoqués tous les évêques sujets de Clovis, et qui délibéra sur les
intérêts religieux de tout le royaume franc.
On ne s'étonnera pas de voir, dans une assemblée purement
religieuse, les groupements se faire selon les cadres de
l'administration civile. La hiérarchie ecclésiastique n'y répugnait pas,
trouvant un surcroît d'autorité dans le caractère national que
prenaient par là ses délibérations. Le concile d'Agde, réuni en 506
autour de saint Césaire d'Arles, avait été, lui aussi, un concile
national du royaume visigoth, et de même celui qui, en 517, devait
se tenir à Épaone, rassembla autour de saint Avitus tout l'épiscopat
du royaume burgonde. Seulement, le concile d'Orléans fut convoqué
par le roi des Francs, et non par un des métropolitains de son
royaume[219]. Roi catholique d'un peuple catholique, Clovis ne
pouvait ni se désintéresser des délibérations du concile, ni rester
étranger aux préparatifs d'une si grande entreprise. Les relations
entre l'Église et lui étaient empreintes d'une confiance et d'une
cordialité qui faisaient de son intervention une nouvelle preuve de
son dévouement. C'est lui qui convoqua les prélats, et qui même, à
ce qu'il paraît, fixa leur ordre du jour dans une série de questions qui
leur furent soumises[220]. Les canons qu'ils arrêtèrent ne sont, en
définitive, que leur réponse au questionnaire royal.
Incontestablement, une participation si active aux travaux de
l'épiscopat franc suppose que le roi est intervenu à l'instance des
évêques eux-mêmes, pour prêter à leurs délibérations une plus
grande solennité, et, le cas échéant, pour leur garantir une sanction
efficace. D'ailleurs, il était l'héritier des empereurs, et l'on était
habitué, dans les provinces, à la collaboration des deux pouvoirs
dans les travaux de ce genre.
[219] Voir la lettre des Pères du concile à Clovis, et aussi leur introduction dans
Sirmond, Concilia Galliæ, t. I, pp. 177 et 178, et Maassen, Concilia ævi
merovingici, p. 2. En 567, le concile de Tours, c. 22, citant un canon du concile
d'Orléans 511, dit: In synodo Aurelianense, quam invictissimus rex Chlotveus fieri
supplicavit. (Maassen, p. 132.)
[220] Secundum voluntatis vestræ consultationem et titulos quos dedistis ea quæ
nobis visum est definitione respondimus. Sirmond, I, p. 177; Maassen, p. 2.
Tout porte à croire que l'idée du concile partit des rangs de
l'épiscopat du royaume d'Aquitaine. C'est immédiatement après la
conquête de ce royaume qu'il se réunit, et cela dans une ville qui
servait de frontière entre ce pays et la France proprement dite. Les
seuls intérêts d'ordre local qui firent l'objet de quelques dispositions
conciliaires sont relatifs aux rapports entre les deux confessions
religieuses[221], qui n'étaient en opposition que dans la Gaule
méridionale. Enfin, la présidence du concile fut déférée, non pas à
saint Remi, qui n'y assista même pas, ni non plus à saint Mélaine de
Rennes, comme le soutient à tort un biographe de ce saint[222], mais
à Cyprien, archevêque de Bordeaux et métropolitain de la première
Aquitaine.
[221] Voir ci dessous, p. 146.
[222] Vita sancti Melanii.
Ce choix est significatif, si l'on se rappelle que Clovis passa à
Bordeaux tout l'hiver de 506-507, et qu'il dut par conséquent avoir
les rapports les plus fréquents avec le métropolitain d'un pays qu'il
avait tant d'intérêt à s'attacher. Comment pourrait-on se dérober à
l'idée que la question du concile a dû être agitée dès lors dans les
conférences du roi et du prélat?
Et s'il en est ainsi, il sera bien permis de faire un pas de plus.
Rappelons-nous que peu de temps auparavant l'évêque de
Bordeaux avait donné l'hospitalité à une autre illustration, amenée
dans les murs de sa ville épiscopale par l'exil, il est vrai, et non pas
la victoire. Nous voulons parler de saint Césaire d'Arles, qui a su
conquérir, pendant son séjour dans la capitale du royaume visigoth,
non-seulement le respect du roi barbare, mais sans doute aussi le
respect, l'affection et l'admiration de tous ceux qui l'approchèrent.
Certes, Cyprien de Bordeaux n'a pas été le dernier à subir le charme
de ce saint personnage, il est peu douteux qu'il n'ait été au courant
du grand projet que Césaire portait alors dans sa tête et qu'il réalisa,
avec l'autorisation du roi, dès qu'il fut rentré dans sa ville épiscopale:
le concile national d'Arles en 506. Cyprien assista à cette auguste
assemblée, et son nom est le premier qui figure, après celui de
Césaire lui-même, parmi ceux des évêques qui en ont signé les
actes. Ils n'est donc pas téméraire de considérer Cyprien comme un
véritable collaborateur de Césaire dans l'entreprise, alors délicate et
difficile, de réunir, au lendemain de la persécution, tous les évêques
catholiques du royaume visigoth[223].
[223] C'est l'opinion fort probable de Malnory, Saint Césaire, p. 66.
Et, dès lors, il semble bien que nous soyons sur la voie de
l'inspiration première d'où est sortie la réunion du concile d'Orléans.
Cyprien de Bordeaux n'a été que l'instrument d'un plus grand que
lui, qui est saint Césaire lui-même. On sait que cet illustre
confesseur n'était pas seulement par ses vertus, par l'ardeur de son
zèle pour le salut des âmes et par la force de sa parole partout
écoutée, quelque chose comme le prophète des Gaules: il était
encore investi, par la confiance des souverains pontifes, de la
mission de les représenter en Gaule avec la qualité de vicaire du
Saint-Siège. Le décret du pape Symmaque qui lui avait conféré cette
dignité, déjà possédée avant lui par plusieurs de ses prédécesseurs
depuis le commencement du cinquième siècle, marquait
expressément parmi ses charges les plus importantes, la
convocation des conciles. C'est donc en acquit d'un devoir que
l'archevêque d'Arles s'attachait à stimuler, à raviver une institution
qui avait été si florissante au cinquième siècle, et l'on ne sera pas
étonné, connaissant son zèle et son abnégation, qu'il ait étendu
l'activité de sa propagande, même sur les pays où il n'avait pas à
jouer de rôle personnel[224]. Ainsi s'expliquent aussi les nombreuses
et frappantes analogies que les historiens ont relevées entre le
concile d'Orléans et celui d'Agde[225]: tous deux d'ailleurs sont des
assemblées nationales destinées à réunir tous les prélats d'un
même royaume, tous deux ont pour mission d'organiser la vie
religieuse dans des pays où elle vient de traverser de pénibles
crises. On peut donc en quelque sorte toucher du doigt le lien qui
rattache au vicariat des Gaules, et par lui à la papauté, la grandiose
manifestation de vitalité religieuse par laquelle se clôturent les
annales du premier roi chrétien des Francs[226].
[224] Je crois devoir citer ici en entier le passage de Malnory, Saint Césaire, p.
114; après ce que je viens de dire, l'assertion de cet auteur que je souligne dans
ma citation ne paraîtra plus fondée: «Stimuler partout la réunion de ces
assemblées (des conciles) était la plus importante des charges tracées dans les
privilèges de Césaire, et on peut croire qu'il y déploya tout son zèle. C'est à lui que
se rattache le mouvement extraordinaire de conciles régionaux et nationaux qui se
produit des deux côtés des Pyrénées et surtout en Gaule, à cette époque. Seul
d'entre ceux qui ont été tenus de son vivant en Gaule, le concile I d'Orléans, en
511, réuni sur un ordre personnel de Clovis, qui fait ici la figure d'un nouveau
Constantin, peut être considéré comme le produit d'une inspiration spéciale
probablement ecclésiastique, mais qui paraît bien être indépendante de Césaire.
Tous les autres, depuis celui d'Epaone en Burgondie (517) jusqu'au IVme
d'Orléans (541), antérieur de deux ans à la mort de Césaire, se rattachent si
visiblement par leur dispositif aux conciles de la province d'Arles, et en particulier
aux statuts de Césaire et au concile d'Agde, qu'on dirait une conspiration de toute
la Gaule pour l'adoption de la discipline antérieure. Le fait que Césaire n'a plus
présidé, après Agde, de concile étranger à sa province, n'autorise pas à dire que
des assemblées telles que celles d'Epaone, Clermont, Orléans ii-iv, se sont
tenues tout à fait en dehors de lui. Les grands métropolitains qui ont convoqué et
présidé ces assemblées ont certainement subi son influence plus ou moins
avouée.»
[225] Arnold, Cæsarius non Arelate, p. 231, note 736.
[226] S'il fallait en croire la vie de saint Mélaine, évêque de Rennes, c'est ce saint
qui aurait joué le rôle principal au concile d'Orléans. Voici comment elle s'exprime
dans sa recension A, qui est la plus ancienne (cf. l'Appendice): Sinodum vero in
Aurelianense civitate XXXII épiscoporum congregavit (Chlodovechus), qui
canones statuerunt, quorum auctor maxime sanctus Melanius prædicator
Redonenis episcopus extitit, sicut etiam in praefatione ejusdem concilii hactenus
habetur insertum. Mais ce renseignement est emprunté à peu près textuellement à
un document du huitième ou neuvième siècle intitulé Adnotatio de synodis, et c'est
ce document que la vie appelle præfatio. L'Adnotatio elle-même, bien loin de
consigner ici un renseignement authentique, s'est bornée à induire le rôle de saint
Mélaine de la place qui lui est donnée parmi les signataires du concile d'Orléans
dans une pièce intitulée: De episcopis qui suprascriptos canones consenserunt et
subscripserunt, et par conséquent son témoignage s'évanouit en fumée. C'est ce
que démontre d'une manière lumineuse M. Lippert dans son beau mémoire
intitulé: Die Verfasserschaft der Kanones Gallischer Concilien des v und vi
Jahrhunderts (Neues Archiv, t. XIV, 1889), auquel je renvoie le lecteur. Sa
démonstration me dispense de réfuter les amplifications d'une recension
postérieure du Vita Melanii (C) qui va jusqu'à prétendre que saint Mélaine, fut mis
à la tête du concile d'Orléans (eum sibi in primatem praefecerunt p. 534) et celles
de Vincent de Beauvais qui, lui (Speculum historiale, xxi, c. 23), croit savoir que
c'est le même saint qui a réuni le concile (hanc synodum 32 episcoporum
congregavit sanctus Melanius.)
Du reste, le premier concile national du royaume de Clovis fut bien
loin d'être une assemblée plénière de l'épiscopat franc. Sur soixante-
quatre sièges épiscopaux que contenait alors le royaume, il vint à
Orléans trente-deux évêques, c'est-à-dire tout juste la moitié, et il ne
s'y trouva que six des dix métropolitains. La plus forte représentation
fut celle des trois Lyonnaises, qui formaient le noyau de la
monarchie: elles donnèrent seize présents contre sept absents.
Dans les deux Aquitaines, récemment annexées, nous relevons neuf
présents et cinq absents. Par contre, les douze diocèses de la
Novempopulanie ne comptaient que trois représentants, à savoir, les
évêques d'Eauze, d'Auch et de Bazas. Des diocèses de la région
pyrénéenne, pas un seul n'avait répondu à la convocation du roi des
Francs. Comminges, Bénarn, Oloron, Lectoure et Couserans
s'étaient abstenus, et il en était de même de Dax, de Buch[227],
d'Aire et de Tarbes.
[227] M. Longnon, Atlas historique de la France, texte explicatif, p. 151, doute
cependant que la civitas Boiatium ait jamais formé un évêché.
Ce qui est très frappant, c'est l'absence totale des évêques des deux
Germanies et de la première Belgique. Mayence, Trèves, Cologne,
Metz, Toul, Verdun et Tongres, ces sièges dont plusieurs ont eu un
passé si glorieux et des chrétientés si florissantes, se tiennent
absolument à l'écart. La seconde Belgique n'a envoyé que les
évêques de ses cités méridionales, à savoir, Soissons, Vermand,
Amiens et Senlis; quant aux huit autres sièges, qui sont Reims,
Laon, Châlons-sur-Marne, Arras, Cambrai, Tournai, Thérouanne,
Beauvais et Boulogne, la place de leurs évêques reste vide sur les
bancs du concile et au bas de ses actes. Que quelques-uns de ces
prélats, et en particulier celui de Reims, aient été empêchés de se
trouver à la réunion, cela est bien probable; mais il est difficile
d'admettre que ce fût le cas pour tous, surtout si l'on réfléchit que les
diocèses non représentés constituent, au nord comme au sud, un
seul groupe géographique. Tirez une ligne qui passerait au nord
d'Amiens, de Vermand et de Soissons, et qui reviendrait vers le sud
à l'ouest de Tongres, et vous aurez délimité la frontière
septentrionale et orientale de l'ensemble des diocèses dont les
pasteurs légiférèrent à Orléans. En d'autres termes, le vieux
royaume des Francs Saliens n'a pas envoyé un seul prélat au
concile. C'est là un indice bien significatif de l'extinction de la
hiérarchie catholique dans ce pays, depuis sa conquête par les rois
mérovingiens[228].
[228] Le canon 10 du troisième concile de Paris, tenu entre 556 et 573, veut que
les actes du concile soient signés même par les évêques qui n'ont pu y assister.
(Sirmond, I, p 317. Maassen, p. 145.) Si cette disposition n'était pas nouvelle, on
pourrait renforcer singulièrement l'argument que je tire de l'absence des noms des
évêques septentrionaux. Mais je crois que ce serait une conclusion erronée: on ne
voit pas qu'avant le concile de Paris on se soit conformé à la règle qu'il trace;
d'ailleurs, il est certain que tous les évêques francs ne furent pas à Orléans,
puisque saint Remi y manqua.
La nature des travaux du concile suggère la même conclusion. Il n'y
est question aucunement des besoins spéciaux de l'Église dans les
provinces où il restait des populations païennes à convertir. Toutes
les résolutions supposent des contrées où la religion chrétienne est
sans rivale. On se borne à légiférer pour des diocèses existants; il
n'est point parlé de ceux qui ont disparu dans la tourmente du
cinquième siècle; le nom du paganisme et la mention des
superstitions païennes ne viennent pas une seule fois sous la plume
des greffiers du synode. Pas une seule fois non plus, les sollicitudes
des Pères ne vont au delà des régions de langue et de civilisation
romaines. La terre des Francs germaniques ne semble pas plus
exister pour eux que si elle avait été engloutie par les flots de
l'Océan.
Après plusieurs jours de délibération, le concile, qui avait siégé
probablement dans la cathédrale Sainte-Croix, clôtura ses travaux le
dimanche 10 juillet 511. Il avait arrêté trente et un canons que tous
les évêques, Cyprien de Bordeaux et les autres métropolitains en
tête, signèrent avant de se séparer. Ces canons embrassaient un
ensemble varié de résolutions se rapportant à la vie chrétienne, et
en particulier au gouvernement ainsi qu'à l'administration de l'Église;
nous les passerons en revue dans un ordre méthodique.
Parmi les questions soumises aux délibérations des prélats, il y en
avait deux qui présentaient un intérêt particulier pour l'État: celle du
droit d'asile et celle du recrutement du clergé. Il s'agissait de
délimiter en cette manière les frontières des deux pouvoirs, ou, pour
mieux dire, d'élaborer des solutions qui pussent être accueillies par
l'autorité politique.
En ce qui concerne le droit d'asile, l'assemblée confirma les
dispositions inscrites dans le code Théodosien, et reproduites dans
la loi des Burgondes et dans celle des Visigoths. Elle proclama le
caractère inviolable non seulement du sanctuaire lui-même, mais
encore du vestibule ou atrium qui le précédait, et des habitations
ecclésiastiques qui entouraient le vestibule. La raison de cette
extension de l'immunité est manifeste: pour que le droit d'asile ne
devînt pas illusoire, il fallait que le réfugié trouvât un logement dans
le pourpris de l'édifice sacré; sinon, il aurait pu être tenté de profaner
le lieu saint lui-même en y dressant sa table et son lit. Le concile
défendit à l'autorité publique de pénétrer dans les cloîtres pour y
chercher le coupable, que ce fût un homicide, un adultère, un voleur,
un ravisseur ou un esclave fugitif; il défendit aussi au clergé de le
livrer, avant que celui qui le poursuivait eût prêté le serment
solennel, sur l'Évangile, qu'il ne lui infligerait pas de châtiment
corporel et qu'il se contenterait, soit de reprendre son esclave, soit
de recevoir une compensation. Si l'homme qui avait prêté ce
serment le violait, il devait être excommunié et séparé de la société
de tous les catholiques. Si, d'autre part, le coupable ne voulait pas
convenir d'une composition et s'enfuyait de l'enceinte, on ne pouvait
pas en rendre responsable le clergé. Si c'était un esclave, et qu'il
refusât de sortir après que son maître avait prêté le serment requis,
alors celui-ci avait le droit d'aller s'emparer de sa personne.
Telle fut la forme que le concile d'Orléans donna au droit d'asile dans
le royaume franc[229]. On conviendra qu'à une époque d'anarchie il
constituait une des plus précieuses garanties d'ordre public, et un
des meilleurs moyens d'adoucir les mœurs. Il ne supprimait pas le
châtiment des coupables, comme on l'a dit souvent; il en atténuait la
rigueur cruelle, il mettait un obstacle à l'exercice illimité de la
vengeance privée, et il préparait de loin la substitution du règne du
droit aux violences de l'arbitraire.
[229] Canons 1, 2 et 3, dans Sirmond, I, p. 178; Maassen, pp. 2 et 3.
La question du recrutement du clergé n'était pas moins complexe.
En principe, l'Église a toujours affirmé son droit de choisir ses
ministres et condamné toute entrave à la liberté des vocations
ecclésiastiques. En fait, certains intérêts politiques et privés étaient
venus mettre des restrictions à l'usage de ce droit. Sous l'Empire
romain, beaucoup de gens entraient dans le clergé pour jouir de ses
immunités, et pour se dérober à l'écrasant fardeau des charges
civiles qui pesaient sur la bourgeoisie. Pour les curiales des
municipes, ces éternels souffre-douleur de la fiscalité, la cléricature
était devenue une espèce d'asile d'un nouveau genre. On sait
l'acharnement avec lequel l'Empire poursuivait, partout où ils
cherchaient à lui échapper, ces malheureux qui lui répondaient de la
rentrée de ses impôts. Aussi ne sera-t-on pas étonné que Constantin
ait défendu, par une loi de 320, l'entrée des curiales dans le
clergé[230]. L'interdiction était radicale, et, pendant tout le quatrième
siècle, elle fut tour à tour atténuée, supprimée, rétablie et renforcée
par les empereurs: encore à la date de 458, Majorien y ajoutait des
dispositions nouvelles[231]. En une matière aussi délicate, les
intérêts de l'Église et ceux de l'État, également impérieux les uns et
les autres, semblaient ne pas pouvoir être conciliés; satisfaire ceux-
ci, c'était porter atteinte au recrutement du sacerdoce; déférer à
ceux-là, c'était priver l'État de ses agents les plus indispensables.
[230] L'existence de cette loi, non conservée, est attestée au code Théodosien,
XVI, ii, 3.
[231] Novellæ Majoriani, t. I, au code Théodosien.
Mais la liberté des vocations ecclésiastiques rencontrait encore un
autre obstacle dans l'institution de l'esclavage. Introduire un esclave
dans le clergé, c'était causer à son maître un tort semblable à celui
que l'on causait à l'État en ordonnant un curiale. Aussi la loi
ecclésiastique avait-elle de tout temps reconnu le droit du maître
dont l'esclave avait été ordonné sans son autorisation à le réclamer,
en dépit du caractère sacerdotal dont il était revêtu. Elle-même, dans
le cas où le maître consentait à l'entrée de son esclave dans le
clergé, ne lui accordait les ordres sacrés qu'après qu'il avait été
affranchi au préalable. L'esprit de ces dispositions se retrouve, au
cinquième siècle, dans les constitutions impériales de Valentinien III
en Occident[232], et de Zénon en Orient[233]: l'une et l'autre
défendent de conférer les ordres sacrés aux esclaves, même du
consentement du maître, attendu, dit la dernière, qu'il peut leur
procurer l'accès du sacerdoce en leur donnant la liberté[234].
[232] Novellæ Valentin. III, tit. XII.
[233] Cod. Justinian., I, iii, 36.
[234] Servos sane sociari clericorum consortiis, volentibus quoque et
consentientibus dominis, modis omnibus prohibemus, quum liceat eorum dominis,
data prius servis libertate, licitum eis ad suscipiendos honores clericorum iter, si
hoc voluerint, aperire. Ibid., l. c.
Tel était, au moment où s'ouvrit le concile d'Orléans, l'état de cette
délicate question du recrutement du clergé. Le concile ne s'écarta
pas des principes qui avaient inspiré en cette matière la législation
canonique et celle de la société civile; mais il édicta des mesures qui
en devaient, sans froisser les droits des pouvoirs publics ou privés,
amener une application plus modérée et plus compatible avec la
liberté de l'Église. Le quatrième canon stipula qu'à l'avenir aucun
homme libre ne serait reçu dans le clergé sans l'ordre du roi ou
l'autorisation du comte, excepté toutefois les fils, petits-fils et arrière-
petits-fils de prêtres, que l'évêque pourrait ordonner s'il voulait[235].
C'était non seulement soustraire à l'interdiction une bonne partie de
ceux à qui elle pouvait s'appliquer; mais encore, par le privilège
accordé au pouvoir royal, mettre celui-ci à même d'élargir les lois en
dispensant de leur application. Le huitième canon était conçu dans
le même esprit: tout en respectant les droits des maîtres, il trouvait
un moyen ingénieux de les combiner avec ceux de l'Église. Il
décidait que si l'évêque avait, en connaissance de cause, conféré le
diaconat ou la prêtrise à quelque esclave à l'insu de son maître, il
était tenu de restituer à celui-ci le double de son prix, mais que
l'ordination restait valide. Il en était de même si l'évêque avait ignoré
la condition servile de l'ordinand; dans ce cas, le dommage devait
être réparé par ceux qui l'avaient présenté au consécrateur[236].
C'est ainsi qu'avec des ménagements pleins de douceur, mais avec
une claire conscience de son but, l'épiscopat franc défaisait maille
par maille l'étroit tissu dans lequel la législation civile enfermait la
libre allure de l'Église. Il ne faisait aucune opposition formelle et
catégorique aux décisions du pouvoir civil; mais, avec un art exquis,
il plaçait à côté du fait légal un principe qui en impliquait la négation,
laissant au temps le soin de supprimer la contradiction en ramenant
le fait au principe.
[235] Canon 4, Sirmond, I, p. 179; Maassen, p. 4.
[236] Canon 8, Sirmond, p. 180; Maassen, p. 5.
Les autres délibérations du concile d'Orléans roulèrent toutes sur

des questions exclusivement religieuses ou ecclésiastiques. Un
canon proscrivit une superstition que l'antiquité païenne avait léguée
au monde chrétien, et qui était pratiquée même dans le clergé
catholique: c'était une espèce particulière de divination, qui
consistait à ouvrir au hasard les Livres saints, et à attribuer la valeur
d'un oracle aux premiers versets qu'on y lisait[237]. Condamné déjà
en 465, par les Pères du concile de Vannes[238], l'abus fut de
nouveau interdit à Orléans sans qu'on parvînt à l'extirper, puisque,
vers la fin du siècle, nous le voyons pratiqué encore par un homme
de la sainteté et de l'intelligence de Grégoire de Tours. Il ne faut pas
crier à la stérilité des dispositions conciliaires. En général, on peut
dire qu'il n'y en a pas eu qui n'ait dû être édictée plusieurs fois avant
de triompher; on doit, au contraire, reconnaître l'excellence d'une
institution grâce à laquelle les évêques condamnaient réunis ce
qu'ils pratiquaient isolés.
[237] Canon 30, dans Sirmond, I, p. 183; Maassen, p. 9.
[238] Canon 16, dans Sirmond, I, p. 140.
Une grande largeur d'esprit présida au règlement des difficultés
relatives à l'arianisme. Le concile favorisa de tout son pouvoir la
conversion des hérétiques, en permettant à leurs prêtres, s'il
n'existait pas d'autre empêchement, de conserver leur rang lorsqu'ils
passaient dans l'Église orthodoxe. Pour les sanctuaires ariens, il
décida qu'après avoir été consacrés par l'évêque ils pouvaient être
affectés au culte catholique[239]. On ne doit pas douter que ces deux
mesures, qui ouvraient si larges les portes de la communion des
saints à tous les ariens de bonne volonté, n'aient contribué
efficacement à l'extirpation de l'hérésie dans la Gaule méridionale.
[239] Canon 10, Sirmond, I, p. 180; Maassen, p. 5.
Le culte et la liturgie furent l'objet de plusieurs importants canons. Le
concile exigea que les fidèles assistassent à la messe entière, et
n'en sortissent pas avant d'avoir reçu la bénédiction du prêtre[240]. Il

PDF A History of Finnish Higher Education From The Middle Ages To The 21St Century Jussi Valimaa Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

PDF A History of Finnish Higher Education From The Middle Ages To The 21St Century Jussi Valimaa Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PDF A History of Finnish Higher Education From The Middle Ages To The 21St Century Jussi Valimaa Ebook Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A History of Finnish Higher Education

from the Middle Ages to the 21st

A Short History of the Middle Ages Barbara H. Rosenwein

Epic Performances from the Middle Ages Into the Twenty

The Hunt for Earth Gravity: A History of Gravity

History of the Middle Ages 300 1500 James Westfall

Cultures of Witchcraft in Europe from the Middle Ages

ARCHAEOTECHNOLOGY STUDIES Raw material exploitation

African Women Early History to the 21st Century

Faces of Muhammad: Western Perceptions of the Prophet

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/6037

ISSN 1571-0378 ISSN 2215-1923 (electronic)

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

6.5.2 The Students’ Socio-Economic Background�������������������� 100

8.5 Business Education and Its Development Towards

10 The Development of Finland’s Higher Education System

11.2.1 Over-Education – Educating Too Many

1.1 The University as an Organisation and Institution

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 1

1.2 Historical Layers in Higher Education

A history of universities presupposes analysing the continuity of academic tradi-

historical development, but, rather, seeks to bridge the traditional sociological

In this book, the approach of historical layers is utilised metaphorically and as an

1.3 The Main Research Literature

1.4 The Scope and Method of the Study

2.1 The First Universities

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 11

2.2 Differences Between Studia Generalia and Studia

2.3 Bologna and Paris as the Archetypes of Universities

2.4 The Relationship Between Universities and Cities

example, in Modena or Padua. The reputation of the teachers at Bologna started to

Les autres délibérations du concile d'Orléans roulèrent toutes sur

You might also like

6.5.2 The Students’ Socio-Economic Background�� 100

8.5 Business Education and Its Development Towards

10 The Development of Finland’s Higher Education System

11.2.1 Over-Education – Educating Too Many

1.1 The University as an Organisation and Institution

1.2 Historical Layers in Higher Education

1.3 The Main Research Literature

1.4 The Scope and Method of the Study

2.1 The First Universities

2.2 Differences Between Studia Generalia and Studia

2.3 Bologna and Paris as the Archetypes of Universities

2.4 The Relationship Between Universities and Cities